Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Alleged Rape Shocks Ohio Town; Hugo Chavez Ill

Aired January 04, 2013 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Top of the hour. I'm Ashleigh Banfield live from New York today.

An alleged rape that went viral is adding to the troubles of an American town that has seen its share of hardships over the years. It is Steubenville, Ohio, which has been struggling since the decline of the steel industry back in the '80s, and today an unwelcome spotlight shining on the town.

It is the kind of place, Steubenville, where everybody knows everybody else and the boys on the high school football team are held up as heroes. But the alleged victim in this case is a 16-year-old girl. She reportedly was drunk and possibly unconscious when allegedly she was raped by two football players.

The alleged rape comes to light through shocking tweets and a cell phone picture and this online video.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What if that was your daughter? What if it was?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But it isn't. If that was my daughter, I wouldn't care. I would just let her be dead.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Listen to yourself.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm listening to myself fine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In about 10 years, I'm going to come back to this video.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ten years. My daughter's going to be getting raped and dead in 10 years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So you heard that. Now you can hear William McCafferty who is Steubenville's police chief.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM MCCAFFERTY, STEUBENVILLE POLICE CHIEF: The thing I found disturbing is depending on who actually was there, why didn't somebody stop it? I mean, you simply don't do that. I mean, it's -- it's not done. (END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Two 16-year-old football players are now set to go to trial. Next month, the lawyer for one of them says the images in the case have been taken out of context, and in a town like Steubenville there are concerns about potential conflicts of interest. It is a small town.

Everybody knows each other. So, Ohio's attorney general is leading the prosecution on this case now. And I asked him about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE DEWINE (R), OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL: I hope people believe that we bring an impartiality to it. Our goal as prosecutors is not just to get convictions. Our goal, frankly, and the ethical job of a prosecutor is to seek justice and find out what happened and to seek the truth and that is what we are trying to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Paul Callan is a CNN legal contributor. He joins me live now on this case.

Where do I even begin? Let's start with the crime itself. I know there is a lot around the crime that is rich in terms of a legal mine field. But the crime itself so far it seems that there is evidence that is gone, deleted photos, deleted images. But there are witnesses who have come forward. That's important.

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR: It's very important. And in the age of social media, when you say there are deleted photos, nothing remains deleted for long when it's on the Internet. I think that is one of the interesting things about it.

There have been reports that a lot of the pictures that would document the crime were deleted the next day from the Internet and from different sites. But there are hackers out there that are using software to get the images back. And in the end, I think you are going to see a lot more detail about what actually happened on the evening that the claimed rape occurred.

BANFIELD: Some people whether they are grownups or kids think that they are pretty clever when they delete things off of their computers at home and don't realize the police are way ahead of them in many instances. There are cached files. They can find these things. Hard drives are one of the favorite things for investigators.

I can only imagine that the investigative team has a lot that they have to go through, because the photos are going to be critical in this, aren't they?

CALLAN: Well, they are going to be critical. I think people don't realize that there are many companies that specialize in creating a historical archive of everything that goes on the Internet. Once you tweet something or once you send a picture or post it on a Web site... BANFIELD: Delete all you want.

CALLAN: There is always the possibility it will be saved somewhere. I think bit by bit we are seeing what really happened in this case come to light as a result of videos and photographs. Now, of course, the young men who were charged are still presumed innocent.

We don't have all of the details. But what is being exposed in terms of photographs and videos is some pretty shocking stuff.

BANFIELD: And the attorney for one of the accused young men was on "STARTING POINT" this morning saying the context, that these things have been taken out of context. But he has not been through the entire discovery process yet, has he? Will he? With the trial next month, will he have seen everything that the prosecutors have against his client?

CALLAN: He will have seen a lot of it.

But when somebody says context, you have to wonder what is meant by that, because in the end if the young girl was unconscious, drunk and unconscious and people had sexual contact with her, that is a crime.

BANFIELD: Can a photo really tell you that? Can a video tell you that?

CALLAN: Well, I suppose unless everything were videoed, it wouldn't necessarily tell you.

But if there is video showing her with her eyes closed and not moving, that is certainly an indication that she was not in a position to dissent.

BANFIELD: Well, we heard these horrible comments saying...

CALLAN: They were describing her as being dead.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: She must be dead because she didn't flinch during one of the attacks.

CALLAN: The thing that I wonder about, having been a prosecutor and a defense attorney, are there young men out there, football players or others who think that because a girl is unconscious as the result of use of alcohol that they can do whatever they want with her?

(CROSSTALK)

CALLAN: Is that context we're talking about?

BANFIELD: I have read the tweets of some people who think it is just ridiculous that she would consider going to a party alone and that this was her fault.

She's been called a trained whore on tweets. Let me ask you something else, though. You brought up the deleted photos the next day. Sometimes kids are smart and they can delete things on their own because they know that they have done something stupid. Sometimes it takes a grownup to tell that child get rid of that. Is that something that can be an actionable offense? Is that meddling with a prosecution or an investigation? Can these people be charged?

CALLAN: That is a very interesting question.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: If it happened.

CALLAN: What people are very shocked about, I think, is that if you have a room full of boys from the football team surrounding the crime site watching it happen and filming it they can't be charged with the crime. As the police chief said, there is no crime for not being a decent human being, in other words, stopping it.

BANFIELD: We don't have a duty, a legal duty to respond.

CALLAN: No, you don't. But on the other hand, if you have evidence and you delete that evidence you can be charged with obstruction of justice. There are a whole variety of crimes that can created by the cover-up happening after the case.

So a lot of these young men who think -- or are being told they may be in the clear here because they didn't touch the girl, depending upon their actions and destroying evidence, they could be brought into this case ultimately.

BANFIELD: I tried to get something on that from the Ohio attorney general when I asked him about it. Are you looking into anybody else in terms of obstruction or making it difficult for the prosecutors or the investigators? He wouldn't go there, but he said this is certainly ongoing, this investigation.

And with trial just next month, it sounds like that might be something...

(CROSSTALK)

CALLAN: The whole country is watching it because of "Friday Night Lights" and this sort of emphasis on football in small-town America. It's a big, important case.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: Thank you. Thank you for your perspective, Paul. You always are great on this. I appreciate it.

I want to move to Venezuela because officials there are conceding today that the situation surrounding their President Hugo Chavez has become -- and I will quote them -- quite serious. Venezuela's information minister is saying a lung infection earlier deemed as under control is not so under control. It is now "severe." He also used the term "respiratory insufficiency." President Chavez is being treated in Cuba where he went December 10 for cancer surgery. To complicate matters, he is to be sworn in for a second term in office in just six days so that part is looking somewhat iffy, to say the very least.

CNN's Jill Dougherty is live with us now at the State Department.

Jill, those are reports that sound pretty dire. Has it taken a while to actually get this information even out to the people of Venezuela?

JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Ashleigh, there are people in Venezuela who say they are not being told the full truth.

But if you read what the government people are saying and also just general information, it looks pretty bad. I mean, Mr. Chavez has been treated for cancer for at least two years and now the prognosis does not look good.

And that is what is bringing, number one, his possible imminent demise, but also the confusion because he is not in Venezuela. He is in Cuba, as you noted. That makes it really complicated to get sworn in again. And so that is a problem. And then you add on to this, this kind of odd quirk of some people being very suspicious that the United States might be trying to engineer something here in terms of a succession and the State Department now for the past couple of days has been saying U.S. is not trying to engineer anything.

There is -- as Victoria Nuland put it, no made in America solution, that whatever happens should be democratic, but the U.S. is not trying to change what might happen.

BANFIELD: I am interested that you brought that up. I want to play a bit from Victoria Nuland as she actually addressed life after Hugo Chavez. Let's listen to it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VICTORIA NULAND, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESWOMAN: We do not believe that there is a made in America solution for Venezuela's transition. Only Venezuelans can make that set of decisions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: That is one thing to say. Only Venezuelans can make that set of decisions. But is it fair of the Venezuelans to suggest that U.S. would ever consider meddling in their affairs?

DOUGHERTY: There was a coup, a very short-lived coup back in I think it was 2002 in which Chavez was deposed, but then came back within a couple of days.

And some people accused the United States of being involved or at condoning what happened. The U.S. denied that and there is no proof that the U.S. actually did participate in that. But that raises the hackles of people, because I think we sometimes forget that he is a legitimately elected leader.

He does have more controls than a lot of other leaders and controls elections processes, et cetera. But he actually was legitimately elected. And there are people in Venezuela who like him for standing up to the United States and paying attention to poor people in Venezuela.

So it's natural that people would think the U.S. is meddling, but again you have the State Department saying, no, we are not. And also these people who think that the U.S. is behind all of this are saying the U.S. has been talking to people in Venezuela, government officials and others, and the State Department today said, we do, we talk with a lot of people but it doesn't mean we are trying to do something behind the scenes.

BANFIELD: I suppose if you import 9 percent of your oil from that nation, that kind of makes it a critical place, too. Obviously, we have interest in what happens to Hugo Chavez.

Jill Dougherty, I'm flat out of time. Thank you. Will you keep an eye on that and give us an update if you hear the slightest bit of information to advance whether he will be OK?

DOUGHERTY: Absolutely.

BANFIELD: Jill Dougherty for us live at the State Department. Thank you.

This is a case that has a lot of people talking. A sperm donor, just a donor being forced to pay child support for the child of a lesbian couple. Yes. Up next, you are about to hear from the donor and also from a family law attorney who says this thing could change the donation game.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: OK. Buckle up for this one. A sperm donor named William Marotta says he didn't ask for pay for his donation to a lesbian couple, but a Kansas court is now saying he has to pay child support for the daughter that was born from that arrangement. Are you following me?

Marotta says it all started after he spotted an ad on Craigslist.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM MAROTTA, SPERM DONOR: Perusing Craigslist just almost like window shopping just looking around and ran across an ad that was asking for a sperm donor. For what reason intrigued my interest. I answered the ad. I didn't know that there was no doctor involved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: He just said it. No doctor involved. No lawyers either, but a signed contract between Marotta and the two moms. And then the women broke up. And that forced one of them to file for Medicaid and that is when things got dicey.

The state came in and said, hang on, we are going after Marotta for child support. At the heart of the case because the donation didn't happen under a doctor's supervision, the law says Marotta is the girl's legal father.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENOIT SWINNEN, ATTORNEY: Under the facts of this case and we are very comfortable that we can provide evidence that the contract was entered into before any donation occurred. We are also very confident that we can demonstrate that the only donation was in a cup. That is an evidentiary issue. That is not a substantive issue.

QUESTION: Would you, knowing what you know now, do it again? Would you respond to the Craigslist ad?

MAROTTA: Probably not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Kelly Saindon is a family law attorney. She joins me live now.

This is a big one. The sperm donor is trying to have this ruling overturned and apparently has a hearing set for this coming April. What do you think is going to happen in this case?

KELLY SAINDON, FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY: Well, to back this up there was previously a case where a sperm donor in this state had gone after looking for rights as a parent and they were told, you are not a parent, you're only a donor, and you get no opportunity to visit with your offspring because you have terminated your rights.

So Marotta's attorney has flipped it and said, OK, he had nothing to do with whether or not a doctor was involved. How is it fair to now turn this against him and seek $6,000 in back child support that the state paid out in benefits and for the rest of this girl's life until he she is maturity's age go after him?

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: Seriously, I would think if you had that little contract that the two parties signed, that would override perhaps that law? Because I get why that law is in place so that arrangements that are set up, people can't go back on them and say, no, no, no, we were lovers and I want my baby back.

SAINDON: Right.

It is also distressing because they do not recognize same-sex marriage so the other parent of this daughter that was born has no rights or responsibilities under the law, so she has been co-parenting but the state can't seek child support from her. The problem is I think Marotta should be allowed not to have to pay child support. He hasn't had any interaction with this girl. He entered into a contract. He kept up his end of the bargain. If anything the same-sex parents who entered into this agreement, they breached it by not involving a doctor. That didn't involve him.

BANFIELD: But at the end of it you still have taxpayers who end up on the hook. The taxpayers don't want to be the ones who have to pay for this child that was born out of this arrangement. I still don't understand though why lawmakers wouldn't look at that contract and just say understandably the spirit of this law was to protect against the scenario I outlined before. This is a different scenario and it is covered by a contract.

SAINDON: Well, hopefully that is what the court is going to do. This is arguably because in this particular state there has been a law against same-sex marriages. This is a way to prohibit somebody in a same-sex benefit from deriving the benefit of having a sperm donor and then getting benefits from the state.

However, to flip the taxpayer argument there are multiple single- parent families that receive benefits and there are many women that get artificially inseminated. Are those eggs actually the property of the mom who donated them if it's not done in accordance whatever the law says vs. the contract of the egg donor? It is really a slippery slope here and it seems that Marotta is getting pulled in and made an example of.

BANFIELD: Let me ask you this, Kelly. I only have a couple of seconds left. But this child presumably when she grows up, could she sue Marotta herself to get child support from her legal dad?

SAINDON: It's going to depend on how this ruling plays out, the one that is coming up in April. If there had not been a ruling in this particular case, yes, she would have standing based on the fact that the law is in play right now haven't been followed.

BANFIELD: Wow. It's fascinating. I think a lot of people are going to be watching this very carefully to make sure if they want to be donors, they cross every T. and dot every I.

Kelly Saindon, thank you very much. Nice to see you.

SAINDON: Thanks, Ashleigh. You, too.

BANFIELD: So, Brigitte Bardot, she graced the silver screen for decades. Gorgeous. Now this activist and actress is threatening to say au revoir to France, her home country. Why would she turn her back on the place she has loved for so long? You might be surprised. It is coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: First, it was actor Gerard Depardieu and now it is former sex symbol Brigitte Bardot. The famous French actress and animal rights activist says she plans to ask for Russian nationality, just like Depardieu did right before her. Depardieu is snubbing French citizenship to protest the huge tax increases on the rich in France. But Bardot is doing it for a whole other reason. She says she is going to leave if two circus elephants in France are put to death there. By the way, the Russian president, he agreed with Depardieu and he welcomed him into the Russian citizenry just yesterday, believe it or not.

CNN's entertainment correspondent Nischelle Turner joins us now with the story behind these elephants.

I think most people are pretty astounded to hear Bardot say this after decades, an entire life as a French citizen, beloved French citizen. What is the deal with the elephants?

NISCHELLE TURNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Let's start with Brigitte Bardot because she has this deadline on her citizenship. She could be making this move actually later today.

She has come out and she appealed to the French president to intervene on behalf of these two Indian elephants named Baby and Nepal. She says if they are euthanized as planned by a French suit today she will request Russian citizenship. She told a French newspaper that the former circus elephants could still benefit from the right veterinarian care and that her foundation could find them a better place to live.

At this point we are not really sure what will happen to the elephants and we also don't know if Russia would welcome Bardot, because it is pay pretty rare for somebody to be granted Russian citizenship. She has got quite the reputation for inflammatory speech. She has been convicted five times in France for inciting racial hatred with various anti-Muslim comments.

And of course there is this other factor here and that is taxes, because this move comes on the heels of Gerard Depardieu, like you said, obtaining Russian citizenship and moving out of France to avoid paying French taxes. The socialist government in France wants to raise taxes on the highest earners to, listen to this, 75 percent. While that tax increase isn't in effect yet, the indications from the current French president are that he will ask for a tax increase.

That was enough to send Depardieu packing. We mentioned again how tough it could be to get Russian citizenship. It does help to have a personal friendship with the president, because the official news agency in Russia reported that Depardieu's Russian citizen was granted to him personally by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

BANFIELD: I did not know that they were personal friends. I wonder how do you just meet Vladimir Putin?

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: But here's the thing.

I know about Brigitte Bardot's past as an outspoken activist on many fronts. But Gerard Depardieu has also had his run-ins with the law. That didn't seem to matter?

TURNER: Well, that's where this whole maybe if you have a personal friendship, then there are other ways to get around it. If she doesn't, it could be a little harder for her.

We don't know, too, if it is just the elephants that have her in a tizzy here because that tax rate is something that a lot of people are bristling at. And that's something that we're kind of seeing here. People say, what is going on, 75 percent? That's a heck of a lot of money.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: That is pretty onerous.

You never know. Maybe Russian President Putin is a big fan of Depardieu, but maybe he should look at some of those photographs of Bardot from the '70s.

TURNER: They might become personal friends.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: Really good friends.

Nischelle Turner, thank you. Good to see you.

TURNER: All right, you too.

BANFIELD: Congress approves nearly $10 billion to help in the superstorm Sandy recovery, but my next guest says that local leaders did nothing and should be held responsible for this in the first place. Hear why coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: The reelection of Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States of America, it is official, believe it or not just this afternoon, in fact. Here is how it happened. A joint session of Congress held in the House chamber. You can see Vice President Joe Biden presiding over it because he's got the constitutional role as president of the Senate. They counted the votes state by state alphabetical order.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the state of Alabama seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears from Mitt Romney of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts received nine votes for president and Paul Ryan of the state of Wisconsin received nine votes for vice president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: It went on and on like this, opening up the sealed envelopes containing the votes of the 538 electors that were recorded on December 17 in state capitals right across the country.

Fun to watch this stuff, because lo and behold, those electors cast their votes precisely in accordance with the results of the November 6 election, 206 electoral votes for Mitt Romney and 332 for Barack Obama. And there you have it, pictures of democracy in action, even though it doesn't always seem that way.

But, hey, today, we had some more of it, Congress passing the first part of the Sandy disaster relief package, $9.7 billion of it. Remember, that sounds kind of short of what it was supposed to be, right, $60 billion.

Our next guest says that, for years and years, New York has been ignoring warnings about a strong hurricane like Sandy, warnings about flooded subway stations and neighborhoods without power.